Methodological Naturalism (Materialism)

[magellan004]

I'm a bozo.

Yes you are. Your suggestion that it was impossible to study gravity before space flight is laughable.
Your suggestion that in order to study radio waves we need to find somewhere where there are no radio waves is laughable.


Magellan

[technomage]

Yes you are. Your suggestion that it was impossible to study gravity before space flight is laughable.
Your suggestion that in order to study radio waves we need to find somewhere where there are no radio waves is laughable.

I did not suggest that in order to study gravity we needed to be in a place without gravity. You asked "How about Gravity? Where is my control for that? Which plant can I point to and say "this one has no gravity acting on it" etc ..." I gave you a method to do so. However, I am quite aware that a microgravity environment would be the worst possible place to study gravity. No, Magellan (provided you're not a parody), it looks very much like your problem is that you thought you had an unassailable argument, and you got irritated when the argument was proven to be very weak.

[Jorge]

Jorge, I agree that you can logically infer the reality of God. But, that is not normally considered science. You can not put God in a test tube.

*****************************************************

(1) That wasn't what was asked. What was asked was if science can be used to
discern a spiritual reality. Yes, it most certainly can be used.

(2) In a manner of speaking, God -- more specifically, His handiwork, His
creation -- may indeed be put "into" a test tube. We do it all the time.
The natural universe provides many clues about God in the macro-, the meso-,
and the micro-cosmos. To wit: when we put DNA into a test tube and examine
it, we learn that there are sophisticated information codes that could only
have come from an intelligent mind. Mass-energy alone cannot account for it.

So, yeah, it may be said (in a manner of speaking) that God is "inside" the test tube.
Just as it may be said that Mozart is "in" his musical creations, Picasso is "in"
his paintings, and so on. I hope you get my meaning.

Jorge

[Wally]

What was asked was if science can be used to
discern a spiritual reality. Yes, it most certainly can be used.

Wrong

To wit: when we put DNA into a test tube and examine
it, we learn that there are sophisticated information codes that could only
have come from an intelligent mind.

Wrong, WRONG

Mass-energy alone cannot account for it.

Wrong, WRONG WRONG!

Incredulity is not a valid argument.

[Jorge]

Wrong




Wrong, WRONG




Wrong, WRONG WRONG!

Incredulity is not a valid argument.

************************************************************

The more you post, the more that I am impressed by your ignorance and low IQ.

Nonetheless, even a broken watch is right twice a day, and here you are absolutely
correct - "incredulity is not a valid argument". Your incredulity about God,
and also about what I wrote, does not validate your Atheistic /
Materialistic beliefs in any way. I'm glad that you recognize this.

Tell you what, why don't you show us all RIGHT HERE AND NOW that I am
"wrong, WRONG, WRONG" about my claim that mass-energy alone cannot
account for sophisticated information codes. All you have to do is to
show us a sophisticated information code emerging from mass-energy
alone without ANY guidance of ANY kind.

Do that and I will loudly apologize plus I will personally pay for your
ticket to Stockholm, where you will go to claim your Nobel Prize.

There you are, now let's see what you got. Otherwise, put a sock in it.

Jorge

[technomage]

Tell you what, why don't you show us all RIGHT HERE AND NOW that I am
"wrong, WRONG, WRONG" about my claim

When you start showing the reasons for your claims (rather than the near-constant "I could show you, but I don't have time"), you have moral ground to make such a request. Until you do that, be silent.

[Jorge]

When you start showing the reasons for your claims (rather than the near-constant "I could show you, but I don't have time"), you have moral ground to make such a request. Until you do that, be silent.

*******************************

That's your comeback ??? THAT ???

Geesh ... you must have an awful lot of free time with jugs of vodka.



P.S. The offer goes to anyone else ...... cm'on all you "geniuses" ...

All you have to do is to show us a sophisticated information code emerging
from mass-energy alone without ANY guidance of ANY kind.

Do that and I will loudly apologize plus I will personally pay for your
ticket to Stockholm, where you will go to claim your Nobel Prize.

There you are, now let's see what you got. Otherwise, put a sock in it.

Jorge

[technomage]

I do not drink alcohol or take mind-altering drugs (save caffeine).

You are guilty (repeatedly) of the very behavior you accuse Wally of. You have no moral ground for your accusation.

[Jorge]

I do not drink alcohol or take mind-altering drugs (save caffeine).

You are guilty (repeatedly) of the very behavior you accuse Wally of. You have no moral ground for your accusation.

***************************************************

I'm glad you don't drink ... neither do I.

FIRST - I made no "accusation" - I put forth a challenge.
SECOND - I totally disagree with what YOU accuse me of, but that's your problem.
THIRD - My challenge goes out to you or anyone else.

Cease the ad hominem and stick to the point. Thank you.

Jorge

[technomage]

There you are, now let's see what you got.

And how many times have you played the coward when asked for some evidence? Don't ask others to do something you are too cowardly to do.

[technomage]

I put forth a challenge.

A challenge you repeatedly evade when put forth to you.

I totally disagree with what YOU accuse me of

Your agreement or disagreement is irrelevant. The evidence is copious just here on TWeb, not to mention other websites you have visited.

Cease the ad hominem

Again, making another request that you are not willing to also follow?

You, Jorge, are perfect proof that there is no Christian God. If there were a creator, and he or she created such as you, they are not worthy of worship.

[phank]

FIRST - I made no "accusation" - I put forth a challenge.

The reward for meeting your challenge, without any exception I've seen, is to be accused of being drunk, on drugs, uneducated, room-termperature IQ, and so on. It doesn't even matter how well the challenge is met, since your challenges are like Hovind's cash reward for proving him wrong to HIS satisfaction. (And how Hovind keeps his Christian word is a fascinating read, like reading Jorge all over again).

The problem here has been called the "black knight" problem, after a Monty Python scene where no matter how thoroughly the black knight is defeated and sliced up, he refuses to admit to a scratch and keeps challenging. Eventually the others realize that where there is no coherent challenge, there is no contest, and they wander off.

[Wally]

All you have to do is to
show us a sophisticated information code emerging from mass-energy
alone without ANY guidance of ANY kind.

Trivially simple, the DNA of any of the planets life forms.

Do that and I will loudly apologize plus I will personally pay for your
ticket to Stockholm, where you will go to claim your Nobel Prize.

Too late, James D. Watson and Francis Crick beat me to it.